Dr. Cho Cho Thin Kyi Associate Professor,YTU Cho Cho Htun

Home , Chauk, Myanaung

YANGON TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

Dr. Cho Cho Thin Kyi Associate Professor,YTU 21 January 2020 Cho Cho Htun 1 Outlines 1. Introduction

2. Ayeyarwaddy River

3. Standard Compared

4. Water Quality measurements and WQI

5. Test Results and Discussion

6. Conclusions

7. Recommendation

2 Introduction  Water quality is defined as the physical, chemical and biological characteristics of a water body  it can be determined by analyzing various physico-chemical parameters and biological parameters in order to check the quality status of water, whether it is suitable for drinking, irrigation or fishing practices.  Rivers and lakes are the most important freshwater resources for human , ecosystem and environment.  Unfortunately, river water are being polluted by indiscriminate disposal of sewerage, industrial waste and excess of human activities, which affects their physico-chemical characteristics and microbiological quality.  Therefore, monitoring of River water quality is necessary on downstream of the confluence of the wastewater into river. 3 Source ; Pearson Benjamin Cummings 4 Ayeyarwaddy

 Length – 2,170 km  drainage basin area -412,650 km2  Annual average discharge - 410 km3/year  Navigable length – 1,534 km

5 Agricultural

Industrial

Bathing Domestic

Fishing Transportation 6 Parameters and Frequency Physicochemical Parameters Frequency 1. pH 2. Temperature, 1st time in January, 2012 3. Turbidity 4. Total Hardness (TH) 5. Total Alkalinity (TA) 2nd time in February, 2013 6. Dissolved Oxygen (DO) 7. Chloride (Cl) 8. Iron (Fe) 3rd time in February, 2015 9. Ammonia (NH3) 10. Nitrite (NO2-) 11. Fluoride (F-)

 The water samples were collected and tested during the low flow period of the year by Directorate of Water Resources and Improvement of River Systems (DWIR) 7 Sampling Locations Stations Description Bhamo,Sinkham,Shweku,Kat Middle ha,Htichaight, Ayeyarwaddy Takaung,Thabeikkyin, River Basin (north Kyaukmyaung,Mandalay,Sag to the confluence aing,Innwa,Myinmu (11) with the Chindwin) Myingyan, Pakokku, Lower Naungoo, Bagan, Chauk, Ayeyarwaddy Sinphyukyoon, Magway, River Basin Myinkon, Minhla, Aunglan, Thayet, Kamma, Pyay, Seikathar, Kyankhin (15) Myaungaung, Hinthada, Ayeyarwaddy Zalun, Dhanuphyu, Delta Naungdone, Maubin, Twante(7)  The water sample stations also were chosen in the urban area, agricultural area and delta area along the Ayeyarwaddy River by DWIR. 8 Standard Compared Surface Water Quality Standard of Malaysia

CLASS USES

Conservation of natural environment. Class I Water Supply I – Practically no treatment necessary. Fishery I – Very sensitive aquatic species Water Supply II – Conventional treatment required. Class IIA Fishery II – Sensitive aquatic species. Class IIB Recreational use with body contact.

Water Supply III - Extensive treatment required. Class III Fishery III - Common, of economic value and tolerant species; livestock drinking. Class IV Irrigation Class V None of the above. 9 Standards Recommending

Parameters Standard Chloride (mg/l) 200 Iron (mg/l) 1 Ammonia (mg/l) 0.3 Hardness (mg/l) 250 Nitrite (mg/l) 0.4 Alkalinity (mg/l) - Fluoride (mg/l) 1.5 pH 6-9 DO (mg/l) 5-7 Turbidity (NTU) 50

10 Water Quality Index(WQI) Weighted Arithmetic Mean Method

WQI = ∑𝑞𝑞𝑛𝑛𝑊𝑊𝑛𝑛 th ∑𝑊𝑊𝑛𝑛 Where, qn = Quality rating of n water quality parameter. th Wn= Unit weight of n water quality parameter.

The quality rating (qn), qn = x 100 𝑉𝑉𝑛𝑛−𝑉𝑉𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 Where, 𝑆𝑆𝑛𝑛−𝑉𝑉𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖

th Vn = Observed value of n water quality parameter h Vid = Ideal value for nt parameter in pure water. (except pH = 7 and DO = 14.6 mg/l and 0 for all other parameters)

th Sn = Standard permissible value of n water quality parameter. 11 Water Quality Index(WQI),. Contd

Unit Weight (Wn) Wn = 𝐾𝐾 𝑆𝑆𝑛𝑛 k = Constant of proportionality k = 1, ,…, 1 ∑𝑆𝑆𝑛𝑛=1 2 𝑛𝑛 WQI and Corresponding Water Quality Status

Sr.No WQI Status Possible usages 1 0 – 25 Excellent Drinking, Irrigation and Industrial 2 26 – 50 Good Domestic, Irrigation and Industrial 3 51 -75 Fair Irrigation and Industrial 4 76 – 100 Poor Irrigation 5 101 -150 Very Poor Restricted use for Irrigation

6 Above 150 Unfit for Drinking Proper treatment required before use. Source:Horton,R.K.,1965 12 Results and Discussion

2012 2013 2015 35

30 C)

◦ 25

5 Temperature ( Temperature 0 Pyay Zalun Katha Innwa Bagan Chauk Thayet Minhla Bhamo Magwe Twante Maubin Kamma Sagaing Shweku Sinkhan Seikthar Aunglan Myinmu Takaung Pakokku Hinthada Myinkon Kyankhin Mandalay Myinchan Nyaungoo Danuphyu Htichaight Myanaung Nyaungdon Thapeikkyin Sinphyukyun Kyaukmyaung

Fig.1 Temperature Variations of Sample Stations . No set guidelines NWQS and ranged 18.4°C – 31.6 °C . The water temperature changes as a river flows though different climatic regions with variation in atmospheric temperature.

13 Results and Discussion 2012 2013 2015

10 NWQS Class II Limit – 6_9 mg/l 9 8 7 6 5 pH 4 3 2 1 0 Pyay Zalun Katha Innwa Bagan Chauk Thayet Minhla Bhamo Magwe Twante Maubin Kamma Sagaing Shweku Sinkhan Seikthar Aunglan Myinmu Takaung Pakokku Hinthada Myinkon Kyankhin Mandalay Myinchan Nyaungoo Danuphyu Htichaight Myanaung Nyaungdon Thapeikkyin Sinphyukyun U/S Kyaukmyaung Stations D/S Fig.2 pH Comparison of Sample Stations with NWQS  pH value between the standards and so aquatic life cannot be effected.  There is no acidity condition according to the three times results.  The increase of pH values indicated that the water is slightly neutral toward alkalinity. 14 Results and Discussion 2012 2013 2015

350 300 NWQS Class II Limit – 50 NTU 250 200 150

Turbidity 100 50 0 Pyay Zalun Katha Innwa Bagan Chauk Thayet Minhla Bhamo Twante Magwe Maubin Kamma Sagaing Shweku Sinkhan Seikthar Aunglan Myinmu Takaung Pakokku Hinthada Myinkon Kyankhin Mandalay Myinchan Nyaungoo Danuphyu Htichaight Myanaung Nyaungdon Thapeikkyin Sinphyukyun U/S Kyaukmyaung Stations D/S Fig.3 Turbidity Comparison of Sample Stations with NWQS

 Range between 17 NTU to 300 NTU.  The highest value of turbidity recorded at Pyay station in 2013 and 2015.  High turbidity increases the water temperatures and which bacteria can grow.  High turbidity is found in agriculture area due to runoff from agricultural practices, soil particles and discharges. 15 Results and Discussion 2012 2013 2015

16 NWQS Class II Limit - 5-7 mg/L 14 12 10 8 DO (mg/l) DO 6 4 2 0 Pyay Zalun Katha Innwa Bagan Chauk Thayet Minhla Bhamo Magwe Twante Maubin Kamma Sagaing Shweku Sinkhan Seikthar Aunglan Myinmu Takaung Pakokku Myinkon Hinthada Kyankhin Mandalay Myinchan Nyaungoo Danuphyu Htichaight Myanaung Nyaungdon Thapeikkyin Sinphyukyun U/S Kyaukmyaung Stations D/S Fig.4 DO Comparison of Sample Stations with NWQS

 ranged from 0.6 to14.9 mg/l. Most of the results are higher than standard.  The DO values are very low at the four stations (Htichaight, Takaung, Thapeikkyin and Kyaukmyaung) in 2015 due to the dumping organic wastes into the river and it is harmful the aquatic life. Low DO causes to an unbalanced ecosystem.  The DO values show random variation from the headwaters to downstream. 2012 2013 2015 Results and Discussion 600 NWQS Class II Limit – 200 mg/L 500

400 (mg/l)

- 300 Cl 200

100

0 Pyay Zalun Katha Innwa Bagan Chauk Thayet Minhla Bhamo Magwe Twante Maubin Kamma Sagaing Shweku Sinkhan Seikthar Aunglan Myinmu Takaung Pakokku Myinkon Hinthada Kyankhin Mandalay Myinchan Nyaungoo Danuphyu Htichaight Myanaung Nyaungdon Thapeikkyin Sinphyukyun Kyaukmyaung Fig.5 Chloride Comparison of Sample Stations with NWQS . ranged from 12 mg/l – 500 mg/l. . Only Bhamo, shweku, Mandalay, Sagaing, Innwa, Shinphyukyun and Zalun in descending order. . High concentration link to washing clothes, discharge of domestic, industrial wastewater and surface runoffs. . The concentration of chloride is low in the upstream during the sample time in 2015. 17 Results and Discussion 2012 2013 2015 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50

Alkalinity (mg/l) Alkalinity 0 Pyay Zalun Katha Innwa Bagan Chauk Thayet Minhla Bhamo Twante Magwe Maubin Kamma Total Sagaing Shweku Sinkhan Seikthar Aunglan Myinmu Takaung Pakokku Hinthada Myinkon Kyankhin Mandalay Myinchan Nyaungoo Danuphyu Htichaight Myanaung Nyaungdon Thapeikkyin Sinphyukyun Kyaukmyaung U/S Stations D/S Fig.6 Total Alkalinity Comparison of Sample Stations

 the total alkalinity is ranged from 5 to 352 mg/l.  no limitation NWQS and WHO drinking standard for TA is 600 mg/l .  Even if, TA values compared with WHO, there is no station exceeding limits.  In spite of lacking the TA for surface water standard, the variation of total alkalinity is reasonable and pH values are within the standard. 18 Results and Discussion 2012 2013 2015 400 350 NWQS Class II Limit – 250 mg/L 300 250 200 150 100 Hardness (mg/l) Hardness 50

Total 0 Pyay Zalun Katha Innwa Bagan Chauk Thayet Minhla Bhamo Magwe Twante Maubin Kamma Sagaing Shweku Sinkhan Seikthar Aunglan Myinmu Takaung Pakokku Myinkon Hinthada Kyankhin Mandalay Myinchan Nyaungoo Danuphyu Htichaight Myanaung Nyaungdon Thapeikkyin Sinphyukyun Kyaukmyaung Stations D/S

Fig.7 Total Hardness Comparison of Sample Stations with NWQS  TH values- ranged from 18 mg/l to 355 mg/l.  It is said that Ayeyarwaddy River water is soft water.  The water is hard only in Twante station due to receiving the domestic sewage and industrial waste of Yangon city and intrusion of tidal water.  The hardness and iron concentrations are lower than the standard except Twante and Pyay. 19 Results and Discussion 2012 2013 2015 2.5

2 NWQS Class II Limit - 1 mg/L

1.5 (mg/l) 1

Iron 0.5

0 Pyay Zalun Katha Innwa Bagan Chauk Thayet Minhla Bhamo Magwe Twante Maubin Kamma Sagaing Shweku Sinkhan Seikthar Aunglan Myinmu Takaung Pakokku Hinthada Myinkon Kyankhin Mandalay Myinchan Nyaungoo Danuphyu Htichaight Myanaung Nyaungdon Thapeikkyin Sinphyukyun Kyaukmyaung

Fig.8 Iron Comparison of Sample Stations with NWQS

 ranged from 0.01 mg/l to 1.92 mg/l  Aunglan and Twante stations in 2012 and Pyay and Twante station in 2013 and 2015 exceeding guideline value.  High value of iron in Twante station is intrusion of tidal water and the impact of the Yangon River. 20 Results and Discussion

2012 2013 2015

NWQS Class II Limit – 1.5 mg/L 1.6 1.4 1.2

(mg/L) 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 Fluoride 0 Pyay Zalun Katha Innwa Bagan Chauk Thayet Minhla Bhamo Magwe Twante Maubin Kamma Sagaing Shweku Sinkhan Seikthar Aunglan Myinmu Takaung Pakokku Hinthada Myinkon Kyankhin Mandalay Myinchan Nyaungoo Danuphyu Htichaight Myanaung Nyaungdon Thapeikkyin Sinphyukyun Kyaukmyaung

Fig.9 Fluoride Comparison of Sample Stations with NWQS

 ranged from 0.1mg/l to 1.5 mg/l  the values of fluoride do not exceed the NWQS values (1.5 mg/l). 21 Results and Discussion 2012 2013 2015 1.2 NWQS Class II Limit – 0.4 mg/L 1

0.8 (mg/l)

0.6

0.4 Nitrite 0.2

Fig.10 Nitrite Comparison of Sample Stations with NWQS

 ranged from 0.1 mg/l to 1 mg/l and most stations are higher than the standard in 2012 along the river.  Myinchan, Pakokku, Sinphyukyun, Kyankhin, Maubin and Twante stations exceed the standard limit in Lower ARB and delta in 2013 and 2015.  Many effluents lead to increased nitrite concentrations in river waters. Therefore, high levels of nitrite in river waters indicate pollution. 22 Results and Discussion

2012 2013 2015 NWQS Class II Limit – 0.3 mg/L 1.2

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2 Ammonia (mg/l)Ammonia 0 Pyay Zalun Katha Innwa Bagan Chauk Thayet Minhla Bhamo Magwe Twante Maubin Kamma Sagaing Shweku Sinkhan Seikthar Aunglan Myinmu Takaung Pakokku Hinthada Myinkon Kyankhin Mandalay Myinchan Nyaungoo Danuphyu Htichaight Myanaung Nyaungdon Thapeikkyin Sinphyukyun Kyaukmyaung

Fig.11 Ammonia Comparison of Sample Stations with NWQS  ranged from 0.01 mg/l to 1 mg/l  Most of the stations along the Ayeyarwaddy River are above the standard limit (0.3 mg/l). It is discharged in large quantities in industrial, municipal and agricultural waste waters.  Ammonia in higher concentration is harmful to not only fish and other biota but also human at higher concentration. 23 Results and Discussion

2012 2013 2015 140

120

100

WQI Values 40

U/S Sampling Stations D/S

Fig.12 WQI Values of the Ayeyarwaddy River Using NWQS 24 Results and Discussion

2.94 %

11.76 %

23.54 %

Fig. 13 WQI Categories of Samples (%) by Yearly (NWQS)

 In 2012, only 52.94 % is suitable for domestic, irrigation and industrial purpose ,38.24 % is fair for only irrigation and industrial and 8.82 % is unsuitable for irrigation.  In 2015, more stations had excellent water quality than 2012 and 13 but  the amount of water in poor and very poor status in 2013 &2015 is more than 2012 as well. 25 Sources of Contamination

 In Bhamo, Shweku, Myinmu, and Hinthada watersheds are extremely dominant by agricultural area. Therefore, agricultural land use is a major factor in water quality degradation in these stations  Mandalay, Sagaing, Pyay and Myanaung watersheds are prevalent with urban and built up area. Increased runoff washes out nutrients from surfaces, eventually entering a stream.  Katha, Htichaight, Kyaukmyaung , Myinchan, Innwa, Pakokku, Nyaungoo , Magwe, Minhla, Aunglan , Thayet and Kyankhin stations are dominant by not only agriculture but also the effluents from industries.

26 Location Map of Industries

Sugar Factory (Katha) Tagaung Nickel Factory ( Hteechiek)

Ginning Factory (Myinmu) Textile Factory(Pakokku) Food Stuff Factory ( Seikphyu)

Oil Refinery Plant HV Ceramic Insulator Factory and Hydrogen Peroxide Factory( Chauk) Agriculture Machinery (Malon)

Cement Factory Ginning Factory (Minhla) (Thayet) Ginning Factory (Pyay)

Cement Factory (KyanKhin) Shwedaung Textile Plant 27 Location Map of Mining

28 Causes of WQ Deterioration

Law Enforcement

29 Conclusion  (WQI) is useful in assessing the overall quality of river water. It clearly shows that the Ayeyarwaddy River water is suitable for irrigation and industrial in middle ARB and the water is only fit for irrigation purpose in the Lower ARB and Delta area. However, the water quality of Twante station is very poor and it is not fit for irrigation.  The values of turbidity, chloride and iron are higher in Pyay station  Might be due to discharge of untreated the sewage from the industries and agriculture sector .  The reduction of DO concentrations in Htichaight, Takaung, Thapeikkyin and Kyaukmyaung is attributed to the discharge of pollutants from industries. 30 Conclusion  The nitrite concentrations in Kyankhin and Maubin are higher than the standard it is needed to monitor effluents of the cement factory in Kyankhin and the fish and prawn farms in Maubin and others.  The ammonia comprising in Inwwa (dowmstream of the confluence of Myit Nge River), Pakukko, Nyaungoo, Chauk, Myinkon, Minhla, Aunglan, Kamma, Seikthar, Kyankhin, Myanaung, Hinthada and Twante are very high due to runoff carrying ammonia based fertilizers into the river. It is an indicator of pollution from the excessive usage of ammonia rich fertilizers. So, there should assess runoff from agriculture wastewaters.  The hardness concentrations and iron concentrations are lower than the standard except Twante and Pyay. According to present study finding, it can be classify Ayeyarwaddy River water as soft water. 31 Conclusion  Ayeyarwaddy River can be described as a river at high risk of pollution from the activities in the catchment with extensive agriculture, wastewater discharge and all mining activities contributing to the water quality of the river.  It is necessary to increase the area of forest land, grassland, and water area and so, there should be implement land use planning in the basin.  The main cause of deterioration in water quality at these monitoring stations was due to the high anthropogenic activities, illegal discharge of sewage and industrial effluent, lack of proper sanitation, unprotected river sites, and urban runoff.

32 Conclusion  Therefore, the basin is necessary to establish the systemic land use optimization and water pollution control and the formulation of policies for coordinating the water resource exploitation and protection by state levels or region levels.  Also wastewater treatment plants should be established with each industry with proper follow-up and the disposal of industrial waste without treatment should be stopped to save the river water from further deterioration.  As a result, all mining operations and their mining wastes are the main sources of river water quality degradation in the upstream of the river and the high sedimentation rate of downstream stream is the impact of the mining operations in the upstream of the Ayeyarwaddy River. 33 Conclusion

 Although DWIR has prescribed “The Conservation of Water Resources and River Law” including the prohibitions and penalties, it is needed to be enforced.  There is also a need of regular and detailed water quality monitoring of the Ayeyarwaddy River and the identify changes or trends in water quality over time and space, to obtain necessary information to design specific pollution prevention programs

34 Recommendations 1. Firstly, for future water quality monitoring, all of the water quality parameters were found to be statistically different by seasonal. 2. To improve water resources of Myanmar, there should be regularly done the monitoring of the lakes, streams and rivers and the land use planning by regional or national law. 3. The public awareness is needed to safeguard the quality of our water sources and there is a need for Myanmar to develop their own pollution load standards and guidelines for surface water. 4. Legislation already laid down should be enforced and industries registered according to the effluent they discharge. Toxic chemicals used in agriculture and industry should also

be monitored. 35 References,

[1] Koshy, M., Nayar, T. V. 1999. “Water Quality Aspects of River Pamba”. Polluion Res 18: 501- 510. [2] Wisam Thamer Jabbar Al-Mayah. 2013. “Effect of Domestic Sewage on Water Quality of Al- Gharraf River in Al-Haay City”. [3] Mishra, A., Mukherjee, A. and Tripathi, B. D. 2009. “Seasonal and Temporal Variations in Physico Chemical and Bacteriological Characteristics of River Ganga in Varanasi”. International Journal of Environment Research 3, no. 3: 395-402.”. [4] Artemis Kitsios, “Effects of Agricultural Practices on the Water Quality of the Scott River: With Focus on Primary Production”. Honours Thesis: Bachelor of Environmental Engineering. [5] Chapman D. 1996. Water Quality Assessments - A Guide to Use of Biota, Sediments and Water in Environmental Monitoring. 2nd ed, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [6] Cho J. H., Sung K.S. and Ha S.A., 2004. “A River Water Quality Management Model for Optimizing Regional Wastewater Treatment Using A Genetic Algorithm”. Journal of Environmental Management 73: 229-242. [7] Assaf H. and Saadeh M., 2008. “Assessing Water Quality Management Options in the Upper Litani Basin, Lebanon, Using An Integrated GIS-Based Decision Support System”. Environmental Modelling & Software23:1327–1337.60 [8] Bartram J. and Balance R., 1996. Water Quality Monitoring: A Practical Guide to the Design and Implementation of Fresh Water Quality Studies and Monitoring Programmes. London: U N E P, Ta y lor & Frances. [9] Gower, A. M. 1980. Water Quality in Catchment Ecosystems. New York: Chichester.

[10] Deumlich, D. & Völker, L. 2003. “Sediment36and Nutrient Loadings Due to Soil Erosion in Rivers”. The Odra catchment. *Thank You